such unnatural and horrible things, with which they peopled their fantastic hell; and thus the Amenti of the Egyptians, as indeed the greater part, if not the whole of their religion, became, in the hands of the Greeks and Romans, a compound of fables and absurdities."

It is very obvious from these quotations,

1st, That the Egyptian Amenti, became the Hades of the Greeks, and the Tartarus of the Latins. The first, the prototype and the origin of the two last. Mr. Stuart here, does not pretend that Tartarus had its origin in divine revelation. On the contrary, it is called the "fabulous Tartarus." Why then say it is a reality, and sanctioned by our Lord in the parable before us? Tartarus had just as little truth in it, as "the fabulous lake Acheron," the "poetical charron and his boat," or "the ideal Elysian fields." It is here admitted, Tartarus, or hell, had its origin in the Egyptian Amenti.

2d, We are told in the above quotations" that Orpheus carried this knowledge of the Egyptian Amenti, or hell with other mysteries into Greece: and in the hands of the Greeks and Romans, it soon became a compound of fables and absurdities." Was it truth, I ask, which in the hands of the Greeks and Romans, "became a compound of fables and absurdities?" Surely not. It was only absurdities, which became more absurd. The Greeks and Romans, improved on the Egyptian hell, as they did on every thing else. And have not Christians adopted the Egyptian hell, with the Grecian and Roman improvements, yea have made some improvements of their own. The Grecian and Roman hell, is more like the Christian hell, than the original Amenti of the Egyptians. Does not Mr. Stuart aver, our Lord teaches a Tartarus in the parable before us, and is not this his hell?

3d, It seems now to be conceded, that the Egyptian

Amenti, is "the prototype and the origin of the Hades of the Greeks, the Tartarus of the Latins, and the hell of Christians." Dr. Good in his book of nature, says

"it was believed in most countries, that this hell, Hades, or invisible world, is divided into two very distinct and opposite regions by a broad and impassable gulph; that the one is a seat of happiness, a paradise, or elysium, and the other a seat of misery, a Gehenna, or Tartarus; and that there is a supreme magistrate and an impartial tribunal belonging to the infernal shades, before which the ghosts must appear, and by which he is sentenced to the one or the other, according to the deeds done in the body. Egypt is said to have been the inventress of this important and valuable part of the common tradition; and, undoubtedly, it is to be found in the earliest records of Egyptian history." The only question to be settled, is-Did the knowledge of this Egyptian Amenti, hell, or invisible world, come from God, or was it of man's invention? If this question can be fairly determined, the hell of Christians stands or falls with it. Can it then be determined, that this Amenti or hell of the Egyptians, was of man's invention? We answer yes, and that to a moral certainty. 1st, Dr. Good allows, Egypt was "the inventress" of this doctrine. Mr. Stuart admits this by his silence, for he does not intimate, it had its origin from God. 2d, what puts this out of all question is, Moses was brought up in Egypt; was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians; consequently knew all about their Amenti or hell; yet, says not a word about it in his five books. But why was he silent on such an important doctrine, if he believed it came from God? What I ask, could prevent him from teaching it, except this-that Egypt, not God was the inventress of it, as Dr. Good affirms. If it is found in the earliest records of Egyptian history, as Dr. Good affirms, why is it not found in the earliest records of divine revelation, if the doctrine is from God?

Mr. Stuart indeed asserts, that there was a Tartarus in the Hebrew Sheol, but assertions will not answer on a subject of this nature. Dr. Campbell, Dr. Whitby, and others, adduce evidence in point blank contradiction of his assertion. The very silence of Moses and the prophets, about an Amenti Tartarus, or hell, shows no such doctrine was believed by them. See my Essays, and Letters to Mr. Hudson, where the origin and history of hell torments is stated at length, and how this doctrine came to be embraced by the Jews, and was finally introduced into the Christian Church. Further evidence of this will appear, by considering another question; namely

2d, Is it true, as Mr. Stuart asserts" that in Hades, Sheol, according to the views of the Hebrews, and of Jesus himself, there is a place of torment, is put out of all question by the passage now before us." This assertion I shall now examine. It divides itself into two parts.-1st, It is asserted, "that in Hades,Sheol, according to the views of the Hebrews there was a place of torment, is put out of all question by the passage before us. If Mr. Stuart here by Hebrews, means the ancient Hebrews, the Scripture writers, his assertion is false. His own examination of Sheol sufficiently shows this, for not in a single text, did he show, that any Scripture writer believed, that in Sheol there was a place of torment. Dr. Whitby, in the following remarks on Acts ii. 27. proves the assertion false. He says "that Sheol throughout the Old Testament, and Hades in the septuagint, answering to it, signify not the place of punishment, or of the souls of bad men only, but the grave only, or the place of death, appears-1st, From the root of it Shaal, which signifies to ask, to crave and require, because it craves for all men, Prov. xxx. 16. and will let no man escape its hands, Psal. lxxxviii. 48. It is that Sheol or Hades, whither, we are all going, Eccles. ix. 10.

scend into it.

2d, Because it is the place to which the good as well as the bad go, for they whose souls go upwards, deThither went Jacob, Gen. xxxvii. 35. There Job desired to be, Chap. xiv. 13. for he knew that Sheol was his house, Chap. xvii. 13. and to descend into the dust was to descend into Hades. Is not death common to all men? Is not Hades the house of all men? Hezekiah expected to be there after he went hence, for he said "I shall go to the gates of Hades," Isai. xxxviii. 30. That is, saith Jerome, to those gates of which the Psalmist speaks, saying, "thou wilt lift me up from the gates of death." The ancient Greeks assigned one Hades to all that died, and therefore say, Hades receives all mortal men together, all men shall go to Hades.

"3d, Had the penmen of the Old Testament meant by Hades any receptacle of souls, they could not truly have declared, there was no wisdom, or knowledge in Sheol, Ecc. ix. 10. No remembrance of God there, Ps. vi. 5. No praising of him in Sheol, Isai. xxxviii. 18. For those heathens who looked upon it as the receptacle of souls, held it to be a place in which they would be punished or rewarded." Compare this with Mr. Stuart's assertion. It is, unquestionable, that Hades in its original signification, did not include in it a Tartarus, any more than Sheol. Dr. Campbell says— it signified" obscure, hidden, invisible. So did the word hell originally." Dr. Whitby has just told us,"the ancient Greeks assigned one Hades to all that died," the same the ancient Hebrews did, in regard to their Sheol. Indeed, the above quotation, stands in direct opposition to Mr. Stuart's views of both Sheol and Hades. Can he, or any other man show, that Whitby is mistaken?

I repeat the question then, what Hebrews does Mr. Stuart refer to in the above assertion? If he means the later Hebrews, the Hebrews in the days of our Lord,

his assertion is true; but the way they came to believe, that in Sheol, Hades, there is a place of torment, does no credit to the doctrine of endless Hell torments. Let us hear Dr. Campbell, one of its professed friends. In his sixth Prelim. Diss. sect. 19, he thus writes."But is there not one passage, it may be said, in which the word Hades must be understood as synonymous with Gehenna, and consequently must denote the place of final punishment prepared for the wicked, or Hell in the Christian acceptation of the term? Ye have it in the story of the rich man and Lazarus, Luke xvi. 23. In hell, en to ade, he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off and Lazarus in his bosom. This is the only passage in holy writ, which seems to give countenance to the opinion, that Hades sometimes means the same thing as Gehenna. Here it is represented as a place of punishment. The rich man is said to be tormented there in the midst of flames. These things will deserve to be examined narrowly. It is plain, that in the Old Testament, the most profound silence is observed in regard to the state of the deceas ed, their joys or sorrows, happiness or misery. It is represented to us rather by negative qualities than by positive, by its silence, its darkness, its being inaccessible, unless by preternatural means, to the living, and their ignorance about it. Thus much in general seems always to have been presumed concerning it, that it is not a state of activity adapted for exertion, or indeed for the accomplishment of any important purpose, good or bad. In most respects, however, there was a resemblance in their notions on this subject, to those of the most ancient heathens.

"But the opinions neither of Hebrews nor of heathens remained invariably the same. And from the time of the captivity, more especially from the time of the subjection of the Jews, first to the Macedonian empire, and afterwards to the Roman; as they had a